1. ENGINEERING / PLANNING ISSUES IN BIKE ADVOACY
ADVOCATE FOR INFRASTRUCTURE THAT IS PRACTICAL AND COST-EFFECTIVE TO ENCOURAGE GREATER RIDERSHIP
Anthony Fernandez, P.E.
ASF Consulting
(City of Madison, Engineering Div. - Retired)
Oops! That’s not a bicycle…)

2. Major Themes of Presentation
Measure Success in Mode Share, not Miles
Focus on the “Low-Stress” Network to Attract New Riders
Embrace Innovation But Don’t Overlook Basic Network of Local Streets
Move Beyond “Complete Streets” to Complete Networks
Look for Solutions With “Greater-Than-Zero-Sum” Benefits
Understand Engineering Concerns and Published Resources to Create Safe, Practical and Cost-Effective Solutions
Choose and prioritize projects to increase ridership, not just mileage. Well used facilities encourage more investment, reduce push-back from opponents.

3. Mode Share Matters
Safety is the most important factor to increase ridership.
Consider location, ease of access and especially continuity
Good data as well as first-hand experience crucial in planning and advocacy

4. Safety is the most important factor to increase ridership.
Mode Share Matters
Safety is the most important factor to increase ridership.
Perception is critical
Primarily means separation from fast vehicular traffic
Good visual clues and directional guidance

5. Mode Share Matters Consider location, access and especially continuity
Railroads, waterways freeways: barriers and opportunities
Convenient access is crucial to success
Route judged by its most difficult segment

6. Mode Share Matters
Good data plus first-hand experience are critical to planning and advocacy
Data supports public acceptance and recognition
No substitute for on-the- ground experience and input from riders
Gap identification G
Good data is hard to acquire but supports public acceptance. No substitute for practical, on-the-ground experience of active bikers.

7. Focus on “Low-Stress” Network
Wide range of user characteristics
LOS vs. “Low Stress”
Understanding bikes as separate mode from pedestrians
Importance of special marking, signing and other visual treatment

8. Focus on “Low-Stress” Network
Separate rights-of-way: Shared-Use Paths
High functionality but difficult to locate, complete corridors
Interface with street network is critical
“Backbone” but not complete network

9. Focus on “Low-Stress” Network
On-Street physically separated from traffic: Protected Bike Lanes
One-Way, Two-Way Counter-directional
Distinct from “side paths”
Challenges and limitations
NACTO for more info
Location Chicago. Credit NACTO.

10. Focus on “Low-Stress” Network
“Bike Boulevards” or “Bike Priority Streets
Defined by special control devices, marking, signing and visual treatment
Volume Management
Speed Management
No widely-accepted definition or criteria
Location Palo Alto. Credit NACTO. Example of volume management. Much discussion on what actually qualifies as a Bike Boulevard.

11. Innovation + Local Street Network
Can be re-imagined in innovative ways while fulfilling all functions
High public acceptance
Potential for more green space
Applicable to typical narrow rights-of-way

12. Innovation + Local Street Network
Local streets are a core element of network but often overlooked
Provide property access, parking while moderating speed and priority
Bike-Only links provide continuity without car volume
Location Madison. Credit NACTO. Note the sign. Also uses sharrows. Much discussion on what actually qualifies as a Bike Boulevard.

13. Innovation + Local Street Network
Low speed, low volume local streets are a core element often overlooked
Enhance with marking, signing, other visual clues
Improve pavement condition and winter maintenance
Bike-Only continuity

14. Complete Networks and Streets
Mobility, access, safety and efficiency guide the process
Flexible, practical approach tailored to specific community
Mapping and analysis needs
Importance of, informed advocacy to identify gaps

15. Complete Networks and Streets
Mobility, access, safety and efficiency guide the process
Big projects needed to overcome big barriers (Beltline)
Projects sometimes opportunity-driven
Function in network justifies investment

16. Complete Networks and Streets
Flexible, practical approach for specific community and location
Well designed at-grade crossings: superior access at low cost / R.O.W.
Wide median refuge at high-volume crossings

17. Complete Networks and Streets
Mapping and analysis: GIS is providing new and powerful tools
Need flexibility to combine on- and off- street, low-stress on single map
Assist with gap analysis, public communication

18. Complete Networks and Streets
Mapping and analysis: GIS providing new and powerful tools
Layers for ownership R.O.W., Parks etc.
No substitute for “ground” experience, informed advocates, designers/planners

19. Greater Than Zero-Sum Benefits
Bike mobility does not come at expense of other modes
Especially consider pedestrian needs
Critical to public acceptance and continued investment in bike infrastructure

20. Greater Than Zero-Sum Benefits
Bike mobility does not come at expense of other modes
Counter-directional bike lane on one-way street enhances bike mobility without affecting autos
Often requires flexibility, creativity

21. Greater Than Zero-Sum Benefits
Bike mobility does not come at expense of other modes
Colored pavement provides safety and confidence for biker
Clear definition of bike space assists drivers as well

22. Greater Than Zero-Sum Benefits
Bike mobility does not come at expense of other modes
European model: provide separate space for bikes and pedestrians
Improves experience for both
Visually intuitive

23. Engineering Issues / Resources
Transitions and intersections more complex than X-C
Don’t let “perfect” be enemy of the “good”
Design standards are for safety and user comprehension, not bureaucracy
Newer standards are innovative, flexible

24. Engineering Issues / Resources
Intersections, transitions are more complex than typical section
Consider all allowed movements
Visit site, understand unique conditions
Seek professional guidance on safety standards

25. Engineering Issues / Resources
Don’t let “perfect” be the enemy of the “good”
Bike speed or priority may have to be secondary to safety
Avoid creating high stress or perceived unsafe conditions
Understand needs of other modes

26. Useful Engineering and Planning Resources
AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities
The “Bible” for geometric and design standards for separate paths and on-street facilities
Updated infrequently and not generally seen as cutting edge of innovation
Authoritative and “adopted” by many States

27. Engineering Issues / Resources
NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide
Indispensable guide to innovative design
Primarily on-line resource but available in paper
Authoritative and informative but not “adopted”

28. Useful Engineering and Planning Resources
WisDOT Bicycle Facility Design Handbook
Official geometric and design standards for separate paths and on-street facilities for WisDOT or federally funded projects in WI
More detailed guidance than AASHTO on many topics
Updated infrequently and not completely current with recent innovative ideas

29. Useful Engineering and Planning Resources
Fundamentals of Bicycle Boulevard Planning & Design
Unofficial but authoritative and useful information on one strategy
Example of many resources supplementing official guidance with innovative ideas
Recommend NACTO for more current info

30. Useful Engineering and Planning Resources
CROW Design Manual for Bicycle Traffic
Official manual in the Netherlands and widely used in Europe
Good source of innovative ideas from places with very high bicycle mode share
Use with caution as some concepts may not be applicable in US cities.

31. ENGINEERING / PLANNING ISSUES IN BIKE ADVOACY
THANKS FOR LISTENING!
QUESTIONS?
Anthony Fernandez, P.E.
ASF Consulting
(City of Madison, Engineering Div. - Retired)
(That’s closer…)